Was anyone else surprised that he said the NHL should get rid of fighting completely ?

I know a lot of folks think the isles v. pens thing got out of hand etc but I was surprised to see Maloney advocating no fighting in the league. His premise was that if the league wants to be taken seriously then they should get rid of it and there is no place for it anymore.

either way it was good to see Maloney on VS.

I disagree with him on this but I generally like his commentary.

WeWillWinTonight

02-15-2011 03:50 PM

Yeah he hates fighting, pretty evident last night.

Bluenote13

02-15-2011 03:58 PM

I agree with him.

Old hockey is holding on too tight, eventually its gonna be a no fight league, that's the trend and rightfully so, the game has changed drastically. All sports have and they are adapting too.

But the savages love their blood and the blood they shall have for at least a little longer !

Blueshirt Special

02-15-2011 03:59 PM

can't we all just get along?

But seriously: I could live without it. It gets to be a distraction at times.

wolfgaze

02-15-2011 04:04 PM

Fighting is okay, cheap shots are not....

NYRFAN218

02-15-2011 04:05 PM

You get rid of fighting and you'll see Matt Cooke and other delivering cheap hits every game since they know they can get away with it without having to stand up to anyone.

Bluenote13

02-15-2011 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYRFAN218
(Post 30944411)

You get rid of fighting and you'll see Matt Cooke and other delivering cheap hits every game since they know they can get away with it without having to stand up to anyone.

That's the perception, and the 'fight clubs' ultimate warning, but in the end guys like Cooke won't be paid millions to play a sport, and he will never be able to hit like that again. Ya think he'll play that way again? Or players coming up will be trained that way?

Its simply up to the owners, when they are ready to take the leap into the future they will do so.

haveandare

02-15-2011 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bluenote13
(Post 30944732)

That's the perception, and the 'fight clubs' ultimate warning, but in the end guys like Cooke won't be paid millions to play a sport, and he will never be able to hit like that again. Ya think he'll play that way again? Or players coming up will be trained that way?

Its simply up to the owners, when they are ready to take the leap into the future they will do so.

Can you clarify a bit? I'm not sure where this idea that Cooke won't get paid is coming from. He's not a great fighter - he's not in the league because of fighting. Him and players like him will be in the league playing their dirty game no matter what happens to fighting. And yes, I think players will absolutely be trained that way in the future no matter what. In the aftermath of fighting being taken out, if it is, everyone will be trying to irritate the opponent into throwing punches now that its illegal, especially players who played in the league when they could fight.

BlueshirtBlitz

02-15-2011 04:24 PM

How about we get goons like Gillies and cheap shot artists like Cooke out of the game, instead?

No reason that two guys who love their team, who can actually play hockey, can't mutually drop the gloves in the heat of the moment.

Bluenote13

02-15-2011 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by haveandare
(Post 30944843)

Can you clarify a bit? I'm not sure where this idea that Cooke won't get paid is coming from. He's not a great fighter - he's not in the league because of fighting. Him and players like him will be in the league playing their dirty game no matter what happens to fighting. And yes, I think players will absolutely be trained that way in the future no matter what. In the aftermath of fighting being taken out, if it is, everyone will be trying to irritate the opponent into throwing punches now that its illegal, especially players who played in the league when they could fight.

The Cooke's of the world will have to play the game without the fights and without the linebacker hits that are delivered with no regard to the opponent no matter what the state of his positioning is in, its still the wrong way to go when playing a game, a sporting event.

Bluenote13

02-15-2011 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlueshirtBlitz
(Post 30944975)

How about we get goons like Gillies and cheap shot artists like Cooke out of the game, instead?
No reason that two guys who love their team, who can actually play hockey, can't mutually drop the gloves in the heat of the moment.

I agree, but that time is passing, the game is changing and eventually one or two incidents will force someone to say 'enough is enough'.

ck20

02-15-2011 04:32 PM

Feelings and emotions are always going to be there and it's going to be extremely tough to suddenly do away with that aspect all together. Like NYRFan said, players like Cooke will continue to play just as dirty as before fighting was outlawed without fear of having to fight, since at that point whoever would instigate the fight would probably get a hefty suspension and Cooke would forfeit next morning's breakfast at most.

RangersRising

02-15-2011 05:03 PM

The day the NHL gets rid of fighting altogether is the day I give up on the league. While the focus now is on a more skilled, high tempo game, fighting is still an important aspect. Aside from the points mentioned regarding policing players like Matt Cooke, fighting can also be utilized to change the momentum of a game. An example of this that immediately comes to mind was earlier this season we were playing the Penguins and losing 1 - 0 in the third with everything going the Pens way. Avery drops the gloves with Asham and scraps. Suddenly the momentum of the game was changed, we took over and scored 4 goals to win the game. This is an aspect of the game I would personally hate to lose.

bmundus

02-15-2011 05:06 PM

New league name: KHL West.
It would be simple to get rid of fighting:
If Refs called the game how it is written in the rule book you will see less fighting right away.
If Campbell and his goons are fair and hand out suspensions that are not a joke you will see less fights.
If the NHL wanted to send a message after the PIT-NYI "game" they would have had both of those teams forfeit, say 1 game PIT and 2 games NYI(home games).
To me fighting is not the problem it is the consequence of not calling charging, boarding, slew-foot and hitting from behind. How often do you see a players feet leave the ice when they show "highlight" hits? But the stick gets parallel to the ice or when trying to tie up a stick and it brakes because of what its made of and its 2mins!
Garys incompetence at his job is leading to more carers ending early then any other sports commissioner ever.

Loffen

02-15-2011 05:16 PM

I wouldn't mind seeing staged fights off a faceoff between two goons that play 5 minutes per night gone.

But remove fighting from the game completely? No way.

The Mouth

02-15-2011 05:16 PM

Dave M never won a fight in his life. He also makes Drury tenure as captain seem Messier like when compared to his own.

I love fighting. It's cheap shots I loathe.

Listen Dave when you can start a sentence without saying "first and foremost" I might just listen more.

He surely analyzes the rangers well if he keeps it short. But when he starts to ramble, I tune him out.

WhipNash27

02-15-2011 05:19 PM

Only way you can get rid of fighting is for the league to actually enforce cheap shots as match penalties and long suspensions with large fines to the player and team especially for repeat offenders. Unless those things are consistently done, then removing fighting makes the game much more dangerous.

The fact is that the best hockey is for the most part fight-free (playoffs). Let's not forget that. We all enjoy a good fight, but let's be honest, it's truly not something that's needed in the sport as long as the rules are enforced and penalties are harsh enough to deter bush league activity.

bourgeoisie

02-15-2011 05:20 PM

I love the fighting. Not the goon vs goon, but teammates sticking up for each other is always fun to watch. If you don't want to fight, don't drop your gloves. Simple as that. You are signing an implied contract once you drop your gloves, and players know that, and they know the possibility of getting hurt while doing it. We need to keep fighting in the game.

Stugots

02-15-2011 05:21 PM

Sadly I think the league will eventually go the route of banning fighting altogether. I don't want to see it happen because I enjoy the fighting, but I definitely think its inevitable that it will be banned once something like NYI-PIT happens again.

WeWillWinTonight

02-15-2011 05:27 PM

The only reason this discussion has been coming up lately is because of what went on in the Isles game. I don't think anyone could argue that those events are acceptable.

But I cannot see the problem in a guy like Prust fighting for 20 seconds to gain momentum for his team.

In other words, fighting is totally acceptable if you have a roster full of guys who can actually play the game. Brashear, Laraque, Boogaard, Orr; these guys are pretty much questionable when it comes to their status on NHL lineups. There are plenty of guys out there who are more skilled and can provide a better quality game.

The only thing that should happen as far as change is teams should build a roster full of their best players and not reserve spots for fighters. There will be guys who can fight and also play the game, i.e: Boyle, Prust, Dubinsky. And I think that this is slowly happening.

Everyone is so quick to modify things, the NHL works so leave it alone.

Inferno

02-15-2011 05:34 PM

i dont want to eliminate fighitng.

i want to eliminate the goons that can ONLY fight.

BlueshirtBlitz

02-15-2011 05:50 PM

What happened Friday wasn't fighting, it was goonery. As much as i'm glad the Isles tried to send a message they wouldn't take any Matt Cooke type ****, it really was just blatantly gooning it up. (Doesn't make Crysby and Lemieux any less hypocritical, though.)

Ovy and Dubi, two guys who respect each other as players and aren't really fighters, going at it IS fighting.

Prust dropping it with a bigger guy to protect or stand up for his teammate IS fighting.

That kind of fighting is what makes hockey hockey, imo. Yes, playoff hockey isn't filled with fights, but having teammates stand up for each other on the ice that way is why I personally believe hockey is the best team sport.

Bluenote13

02-15-2011 05:58 PM

I remember when the best intimidators didn't have to throw a punch. That's the kind of teammate I always liked on my side:D

DubiDubiDoo

02-15-2011 06:52 PM

Fighting is one of the GREAT things about the sport of Hockey and I'd hate to ever see it go.
It sets the league apart from other sports, where its ok for two grown men to hammer it out face to face if they believe it helps the team and fires up the crowd.
It just screams "I know its just a game, but don't think I wont leave everything out here for this game"
Cheap shots are what need to go, not fighting. And I wish people would stop calling the Isles-Pens thing fighting, that was blatant goonery that was suspended, it wasn't fighting

haveandare

02-15-2011 07:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bluenote13
(Post 30945056)

The Cooke's of the world will have to play the game without the fights and without the linebacker hits that are delivered with no regard to the opponent no matter what the state of his positioning is in, its still the wrong way to go when playing a game, a sporting event.

Why would they stop hitting carelessly because fighting is taken out of the game? I'm not trying to be difficult, I'm just admittedly not really following. I think they'd play cheap more often because they know that the opponent can't physically retaliate and if they do they'll be in much more serious trouble.